are both in a dangerous state; and there is but one way for both to be safe, which is by coming as often and as well prepared as they can; and then God will not fail to forgive, and kindly to accept them, notwithstanding their numerous infirmities.

The first preparation needful is to acquaint ourselves with the meaning of the institution, which is more comprehensive than it appears to be at first sight; nor ought this to surprise us, for the elements are, as it were, "visible words," declaring by significant symbols the main points of our faith and hope: nor does it stand alone as an unconnected rite, for our Lord calls it a new covenant, in opposition to the former national one; and it was ordained after the paschal supper, that as hitherto they had celebrated the temporal deliverance of their ancestors, they were henceforward to commemorate their own spiritual and eternal salvation. Unhappily too this Christian feast, designed to be the memorial of our love to each other, as well as to our common Master, has become a mark of our differences; it has given birth angry discussions even among Protestants,

to

and has been so perverted by the Romanist, that none of the former can conscientiously join with him in a celebration which in them would be blasphemous and idolatrous. It would be melancholy and perplexing to be left to collect our notions of it from so uncertain a guide as tradition; which in handing down this Sacrament has been peculiarly unfortunate, for it has deprived the laity of half of the elements, and has materially affected its character. We ought to be grateful that we have access to an infallible source of divine knowledge, the word of God; for without it I know not how it would have been possible to have freed it from its grossest abuses, and restored it to its original simplicity.

The institution is described in the first three Gospels; and as it is passed over by St. John, though he records the preceding supper with the conversation, and our Saviour's intercessory prayer, we may conclude, from his silence, that they had communicated all the necessary information. We have a fourth inspired account in St. Paul's first Epistle to the Corinthians, independent of them,

66

for it was specially revealed to him by Christ, a sufficient evidence of the importance and perpetuity of the ordinance; and we learn from him, what we could only infer from the Gospels, that it was designed to be perpetual, you hereby shew forth the Lord's death till he come." From all these accounts we collect', that the main design of the Lord's Supper is, as he declared in instituting it, the commemoration of him, "this do in remembrance of me:" but as the nature of that remembrance is not there explained by him, we must learn in what capacity we are to remember him, from those passages of Scripture, which declare who and what he is. They will teach us, with the Antitrinitarians, that it is not sufficient to remember him as a great and good man, as a wise instructor, or even as the most eminent of prophets, the revealer of the Divine will, and the future Judge of all men; for, according to the whole tenor of the Bible, Jesus Christ is our Lord and Master, in the highest sense, as both our Creator and Redeemer; and, as such, he has a

1 Waterland.

rightful claim to be worshipped and obeyed. Now, since the value of what he has done and suffered for us rises in proportion to the dignity of his person, it is manifest that we cannot suitably remember him in the Sacrament, if we entertain not these high conceptions of him, which such his dignity demands; for it is his divinity that renders the sufferings of his human nature efficacious. If the sending of him into the world to die for us be the highest instance of divine love which could have been given, we are bound, in return, to express our thankfulness in a suitable manner. But this suitable return is impracticable, without a just sense of the favour granted; and if no just sense can be had of it, while we take away the consideration which most of all enhances its value, the conclusion is plain, that as often as we remember Christ in the Eucharist, we ought to remember him as an almighty Saviour, as the only-begotten of the Father, God of God, "of glory equal, of majesty co-eternal." But further we have to remember, not only Christ, but his death, and this death must be remembered as a

proper expiatory sacrifice. Such a com

memoration is a suing for pardon, in virtue of the same plea that Christ himself urges in our behalf in heaven, where he intercedes for us as a priest, (iegeùs,) by pleading the meritorious efficacy of his one oblation of himself once offered on the cross. It is an acknowledgment of our entire dependence on the satisfaction which he there made for our sins. This remembrance then, when duly made, is a service of thanksgiving for redemption, and a service also of self-humiliation before God and man, since it declares, that this allsufficient sacrifice can alone procure our acceptance.

The due commemoration of our Lord's death, we thus perceive, includes a public avowal of the leading doctrines of Christianity; and this it is our duty, and ought to be our delight, to make. Such an avowal is a protest against infidelity; and while it strengthens our own faith, it has a tendency to overcome the misgivings of those that have doubts. But we are taught to advance higher, and to regard this Sacrament as a federal service; and this, not only from its resemblance to the passover, a federal rite, typical of it, which it supersedes, and from

C